Ohio

Profile vs. FBS, 2024

Farther out is better on every spoke. Dashed ring: the FBS median.

• EPA per play

  Expected points added on an average snap: how much each play moved the scoring odds.
  Offense+0.2079th
  Defense+0.0574th
• Success rate

  Share of snaps that stayed on schedule: half the yards needed on 1st down, 70% on 2nd, all of them on 3rd or 4th.
  Offense45.8%79th
  Defense37.3%92nd
• Explosiveness

  Average EPA on the successful snaps: how big the good plays were.
  Offense+1.2332nd
  Defense+1.3037th
• Rushing EPA

  EPA per designed run.
  Offense+0.2289th
  Defense−0.0898th
• Passing EPA

  EPA per pass play.
  Offense+0.1856th
  Defense+0.1842nd
• Standard downs

  Success rate on downs where either a run or a pass makes sense, like 1st and 10 or 3rd and 2.
  Offense49.3%64th
  Defense44.3%77th
• Passing downs

  Success rate on downs that all but force a pass, like 2nd and 8 or longer, or 3rd and 5 or longer.
  Offense37.1%92nd
  Defense24.3%97th
• Line yards

  Rushing yards per carry credited to the offensive line, weighting the first few yards most.
  Offense3.1062nd
  Defense2.4895th
• Stuff rate

  Share of runs stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage.
  Offense17.1%55th
  Defense23.5%91st
• Havoc

  Share of snaps with a tackle for loss, sack, forced fumble, interception or pass breakup.
  Offense14.9%69th
  Defense20.7%95th

Percentiles among the 134 FBS teams this season, where higher is better for the offense and the defense alike (a defense's numbers are what it allowed). The line in each bar is the FBS median. Garbage time excluded. Source: CollegeFootballData.

Drives vs. expectation, 2024

Every snap has an expected-points value: what a drive from that spot, down and distance is worth on average. A drive over expected beat its starting spot; defense counts what Ohio allowed, so lower is better. The adjusted number fits every team against the opponents it actually played, so it leans toward average early in a season. Ranks are among FBS teams.

Game by game

1. L
   SYR
2. W
   USA
3. W
   MORG
4. L
   UK
5. W
   AKR
6. W
   CMU
7. L
   M-OH
8. W
   BUF
9. W
   KENT
10. W
    EMU
11. W
    TOL
12. W
    BALL
13. W
    M-OH
14. W
    JXST

Bars above the line: better than expected for Ohio.

Players, 2024

1. Parker NavarroQB374 plays · +0.265 pts/play · 35th of 232 QBs
   1.86WAR1.21 to 2.55
2. Anthony Tyus IIIRB200 plays · +0.126 pts/play · 30th of 373 RBs
   0.47WAR0.32 to 0.61
3. Coleman OwenWR69 plays · +0.175 pts/play · 26th of 452 WRs
   0.23WAR0.09 to 0.36
4. Rickey Hunt Jr.RB48 plays · +0.113 pts/play · 242nd of 373 RBs
   0.10WAR0.07 to 0.13
5. Chase HendricksWR43 plays · +0.079 pts/play · 209th of 452 WRs
   0.06WAR0.00 to 0.14
6. Gianni SpeticPK13 plays · +0.185 pts/play · 93rd of 114 kickers
   0.05WAR0.01 to 0.08
7. Mason WilliamsTE13 plays · +0.143 pts/play · 94th of 221 TEs
   0.03WAR0.01 to 0.06
8. Jack WilsonP51 plays · −0.005 pts/play · 98th of 106 punters
   0.00WAR−0.09 to 0.09

By position group, against FBS

Linemen and defenders are valued as units, in points per game against the median FBS unit, because play-by-play doesn't say who was on the field. Players are valued against a replacement-level backup, so the two aren't added together.

Wins above replacement credits each play's expected points to the players involved, adjusted for the opponent, and compares Ohio's players with a typical backup; 53 points make a win. Only snaps while the game was in doubt count, so a starter on a team that blows opponents out plays fewer of them: read value per play beside WAR. The line under each player (or the range on a phone) is the 90% interval. Ranks are among FBS teams and players. How this works

What it had and what it did, 2024

• Roster talent

  247Sports' talent composite: the recruiting ratings of every player on the roster, transfers included.
  451451123rd of 131Roster talent: 451, 123rd of 131 in FBS
• Recruiting

  Average 247Sports class score over this season's class and the three before it.
  122122113th of 131Recruiting: 122, 113th of 131 in FBS
• Returning production

  Share of last season's production (expected points added) by players still on the roster.
  13%13%126th of 130Returning production: 13%, 126th of 130 in FBS
• SP+ rating

  The result: Bill Connelly's opponent-adjusted rating, points per game better than an average FBS team.
  +2.3+2.361st of 131SP+ rating: +2.3, 61st of 131 in FBS

Ranks and bars among the 131 FBS teams with a talent rating this season, best first; the line in each bar is the FBS median.

Talent conversion

Conversion by season

Fourth-down calls vs. the numbers, 2024

Each real fourth down is valued three ways (go for it, kick, punt) from the score, clock and field position before the snap, using league-wide odds rather than Ohio's own. A call that differs gives up the gap to the best option; gaps under one point are close calls, and the 7 clear-cut ones account for 0.11 of the 0.17 expected wins. The model sees the situation, not the injury report, so a call it disagrees with can still be right. Ranks are among FBS teams; 1st gave up the least.

Costliest calls against the numbers

1. vs AKRQ3 6:21 4th & 3 at AKR 40, up 4Punted; the numbers favored going for it−2.0 pts
2. at CMUQ3 5:27 4th & 1 at OHIO 39, up 16Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
3. vs USAQ2 6:54 4th & 1 at OHIO 18, up 10Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.9 pts
4. at JXSTQ3 7:56 4th & 1 at OHIO 34, up 13Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.5 pts
5. vs AKRQ4 14:50 4th & 3 at OHIO 10, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
6. vs AKRQ4 14:50 4th & 3 at OHIO 10, up 6Punted; the numbers favored going for it−1.4 pts
7. at CMUQ4 5:17 4th & 4 at CMU 28, up 6Kicked a field goal; the numbers favored going for it−1.1 pts
8. at TOLQ2 1:03 4th & 3 at TOL 47, down 7Punted; the numbers favored going for it (close call)−0.8 pts

Record vs. expectation, 2024

7th of 134 FBS teams at beating the model's pregame expectations

Expected wins adds up Ohio's chance of winning each game as the model saw it at kickoff - a 70% favorite counts 0.7.

1. L

   SYR
2. W

   USA
3. W

   MORG
4. L

   UK
5. W

   AKR
6. W

   CMU
7. L

   M-OH
8. W

   BUF
9. W

   KENT
10. W

    EMU
11. W

    TOL
12. W

    BALL
13. W

    M-OH
14. W

    JXST

What moved it, 2024

Every game starts at Ohio's pregame chance; everything after that is the field. The model's own breakdown of each game's final play splits the on-field part by what drove it, and the parts add up exactly. How it works →

• Scoreboard+3.24
• Clock+0.11
• Timeouts+0.05
• Less the pregame edge, counted before kickoff−0.28

Game by game

• SYRL 22-38 at SYR11% → 1%Before kickoff −39 · On the field −10: Scoreboard −17
• USAW 27-20 vs USA45% → 98%Before kickoff −5 · On the field +54: Scoreboard +43, Timeouts +3
• MORGW 21-6 vs MORG93% → 99%Before kickoff +43 · On the field +6: Scoreboard +12
• UKL 6-41 at UK8% → 0%Before kickoff −42 · On the field −8: Scoreboard −11
• AKRW 30-10 vs AKR71% → 100%Before kickoff +21 · On the field +29: Scoreboard +29, Timeouts +1
• CMUW 27-25 at CMU53% → 95%Before kickoff +3 · On the field +42: Scoreboard +47, Clock +3
• M-OHL 20-30 at M-OH36% → 3%Before kickoff −14 · On the field −32: Scoreboard −32, Possession & field position −1
• BUFW 47-16 vs BUF64% → 100%Before kickoff +14 · On the field +36: Scoreboard +35, Timeouts +1
• KENTW 41-0 at KENT89% → 100%Before kickoff +39 · On the field +11: Scoreboard +17
• EMUW 35-10 vs EMU76% → 100%Before kickoff +26 · On the field +23: Scoreboard +27, Timeouts −1
• TOLW 24-7 at TOL43% → 99%Before kickoff −7 · On the field +56: Scoreboard +55, Clock +3
• BALLW 42-21 vs BALL86% → 100%Before kickoff +36 · On the field +14: Scoreboard +18
• M-OHW 38-3 at M-OH38% → 100%Before kickoff −12 · On the field +62: Scoreboard +60, Clock +2
• JXSTW 30-27 at JXST66% → 93%Before kickoff +16 · On the field +27: Scoreboard +41, Clock +3

Points of win probability, from Ohio's side.

Closest call

OHIO 30-27 WYO (2022) - Ohio dropped to a 10.5% win probability before pulling it out.